How to Build Courage Through Personality Traits and States of Mind
[Photo by feuerwehr-weblog]
New research suggests courage is driven by personality traits, self-efficacy, hope, resilience, values, beliefs and social forces. PsyBlog shows how all these can be enhanced.How does a fire-fighter steal themselves to enter a burning building? How does an anxious person pluck up the courage to introduce themselves to a stranger? How does a severely depressed individual find the strength to go through the motions of another day? All require courage, but courage is an elusive quality. Continuing the series on positive psychology we look at the components that make up courage and how these can be developed.
Sean Hannah and colleagues (Hannah, Sweeney & Lester, 2007) from the United States Military Academy, writing in The Journal of Positive Psychology, provide a new model of courage. In it they set out a web of interrelated factors thought to feed into the subjective experience of courage.
Broadly they suggest that levels of courage are influenced by character traits, particular states of mind and the values, beliefs and social forces acting on a person. Alongside these factors set out below, I've provided suggestions for how each can be increased.
Courageous character traits
Firstly, then, the following three character traits are thought important in courage:
1. Openness to experience: This trait is associated with both divergent thinking, e.g. brainstorming, and the related idea of creativity. Being courageous, then, is all about having options, and in order to generate those options you need to be creative.
How can it be increased? Techniques which may help increase divergent thinking are brainstorming, keeping a journal, free writing and mind mapping. Whether these will lead back into increased openness to experience, however, is unknown. It's unlikely to cause you any harm though!
2. Conscientiousness: the conscientious are dependable people who feel a sense of duty towards themselves and others. They get the job done.
How can it be increased? One way to increase conscientiousness may be to commit to more social institutions such as marriage, work, family or other role in the community. This suggestion comes from research that has found conscientiousness increases with age, which is also associated with greater work, family and social commitments.
3. Core self-evaluation: these include traits like emotional stability and internal locus of control. An internal locus of control refers to a feeling of control over situations.
How can it be increased? Increasing locus of control can be achieved through cognitive therapy. Central to cognitive therapy is the idea that our outlook on life is fundamentally affected by how we explain what happens to us and others - the attributions we use. Changing these attributions can lead to changes in core self-evaluations.
Remember that these first three components are 'traits' meaning they are thought to be relatively stable across situations and across time-points. While they can, and do change, they will be difficult to budge quickly or easily.
Courageous states of mind
The following four states of mind are, though, more open to adjustment and may be better bets for increasing courage in the moment:
1. Self-efficacy: essentially means confidence in yourself and your ability to achieve desired outcomes.
How can it be increased? Two important predictors of self-efficacy are firstly mastering a skill and secondly cognitively reinterpreting current situations. So, self-efficacy can be increased through practicing a task and through the way it is cognitively represented.
2. Means efficacy: this is the belief that the tools available can do the job.
How can it be increased? They say a bad workman blames his tools - so a good workmen sees potential in his tools to complete the job. Really believing you can use what you've got is half the battle.
3. State hope: believing the task is possible and seeing a way of carrying it out at the time at which it needs to be done.
How can it be increased? Like locus of control, state hope can be increased using cognitive therapy. At heart, the idea is to change the attributions we make.
4. Resilience: this is bounce-back-ability. It's also having the belief that should the inevitable problems arise, you'll be able to overcome them.
How can it be increased? Research suggests resilience may be predicted by positive emotions. Generating amusement, interest or any other positive emotion is likely to increase levels of resilience. Essentially, it may be possible to laugh off the fear often experienced when being courageous.
Convictions and social forces
There are two final components important in Hannah and colleagues' model of courage:
1. Inner convictions: these include independence, selflessness, integrity and honour. These types of beliefs can all have important effects on behaviour in the face of fear.
How can it be increased? Inner convictions can come from a variety of sources such as philosophy, societal beliefs or religion.
2. Social forces: really important, some might even argue this is the most important. People look at how other's react to a situation, then think how they should act in relation to other people.
How can it be increased? Essentially courage is socially contagious. The practical advice from this is simple: to increase your courage, hang out with courageous people.
Interrelationships
While I've considered each of these factors separately, in Hannah's model they are all interrelated. For example positive emotions are likely to lead to less experienced fear, which also leads to more courageous behaviours which leads to the subjective experience of courageousness which in turn will feed back into positive emotional states.
Only courage by a different name?
One of the main criticisms of these types of models is that they just re-describe courage in terms of different attributes. There is some truth to that, but only some. The strength of this model is that it breaks down courage into its components so that each can be individually targeted.
I see a way
For myself, while increasing my 'courage' is too vague and abstract, I can see ways in which I might increase my resilience, means efficacy and state hope. And, as the model suggests, seeing how the tools can be used to achieve a goal (means efficacy) is half the battle.
» Read more on positive psychology
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Reference
Hannah, S., Sweeney, P. J., & Lester, P. B. (2007). Toward a courageous mindset: The subjective act and experience of courage. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2(2), 129-135. (Abstract)
Labels: Courage, Positive Psychology
How to Improve Mood, Raise Energy and Reduce Tension
[Photo by eschipul]
What strategies do you use to make yourself feel better, increase your energy levels and reduce your tension? That's the question Robert Thayer and colleagues at California State University were motivated by in looking for the strategies people use and find effective (Thayer, Newman & McClain, 1994). There's no revelations in the results but the fact that the same three main strategies were useful in changing mood and reducing tension and raising energy speaks volumes:- Exercise: rated as the most effective for changing a bad mood, also good for raising energy and reducing tension.
- Music: rated the second most successful way to change a bad mood, and raising energy and reducing tension. This may be a surprising finding for some people.
- Social interaction: good for changing a bad mood and reducing tension although not necessarily so good for raising energy.
Apart from these main categories that were good across the board, there were other strategies that worked in a more selective fashion:
- Pep talk: this was rated as most successful for energy enhancement - above both exercise and music.
- Distractions (like shopping, reading, chores and hobbies): seen as useful for changing a bad mood.
At the other end of the scale, the things people rated as relatively less successful were:
- TV: less effective for reducing tension
- Eating: also less effective for reducing tension.
- Coffee: not that good for raising energy, relative to the other categories.
Gender differences were also seen. Men are more likely to try and distract themselves or seek pleasure, while women are more likely to seek social support.
One surprising finding from this study is how successful music is in all three categories of mood regulation, energy raising and tension reduction. In fact I've written before about the seven ways music influences mood.
I know the findings from this study are mostly pretty obvious but intellectually knowing what is good for us can be a world away from actually doing it.
» Read more from PsyBlog on the power of positive psychology.
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Reference
Thayer, R. E., Newman, J. R., & McClain, T. M. (1994). Self-regulation of mood: Strategies for changing a bad mood, raising energy, and reducing tension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(5), 910-925.
Labels: Emotion, Music, Positive Psychology
Cradling to Right Linked to Depression in New Mothers - Or is it?
Is this mother depressed?
The mainstream media are reporting that the side on which mothers cradle their babies may be linked to maternal depression (Foxnews, The Telegraph). First, there's the background to the story and second I explain why this study has been misrepresented. The Guardian writes:
It is accurate that there is a finding from previous research that (non-stressed or depressed) mothers tend to cradle their babies to the left. Further, it has been found previously that depressed mothers have a tendency to cradle their babies to the right.
Unlike the write-up in The Guardian (and elsewhere) it's not mentioned that this study (published online in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry) does flatly contradict previous work in one important respect. As the authors themselves point out, previous research found that depressed mothers hold their babies on the right, in opposition to this, the current study found depressed (but not stressed) mothers showed a bias towards the left - which is the way all mothers show a preference for holding their babies.
This is somewhat covered up by focussing on the fact that 'stressed' and depressed mothers tend to hold their babies to the right.
Not mentioning the contradiction significantly reduces the impressive media spin on the story. This is that doctors may be able to tell if mothers are depressed from the side on which they hold their baby. Even if this were a useful marker, the fact that the studies are contradictory is evidence that further work needs to be done.
The second point to note about this study is that it is based on a small number of participants (79). Since these were then split into four categories - and most mothers were not depressed - that doesn't leave many in some of the categories. In fact as few as 6 in the 'only depressed' category. That is low.
While this study is really interesting, there's obviously some way to go yet - something that is fully acknowledged by the authors of the study but totally glossed over in the mainstream media reports.
Read the study's abstract
The mainstream media are reporting that the side on which mothers cradle their babies may be linked to maternal depression (Foxnews, The Telegraph). First, there's the background to the story and second I explain why this study has been misrepresented. The Guardian writes:
"New mothers who cradle their infants on the right side of their body may be displaying signs of "extreme stress". The findings build on previous research showing that most mothers prefer to hold their baby to their left, regardless of whether they are left- or right-handed.
The study suggests there is a correlation between the minority who hold a baby on the right and a greater likelihood that they are experiencing stress beyond the levels natural in new parents."
It is accurate that there is a finding from previous research that (non-stressed or depressed) mothers tend to cradle their babies to the left. Further, it has been found previously that depressed mothers have a tendency to cradle their babies to the right.
Flat contradiction of previous work
Unlike the write-up in The Guardian (and elsewhere) it's not mentioned that this study (published online in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry) does flatly contradict previous work in one important respect. As the authors themselves point out, previous research found that depressed mothers hold their babies on the right, in opposition to this, the current study found depressed (but not stressed) mothers showed a bias towards the left - which is the way all mothers show a preference for holding their babies.
This is somewhat covered up by focussing on the fact that 'stressed' and depressed mothers tend to hold their babies to the right.
Not mentioning the contradiction significantly reduces the impressive media spin on the story. This is that doctors may be able to tell if mothers are depressed from the side on which they hold their baby. Even if this were a useful marker, the fact that the studies are contradictory is evidence that further work needs to be done.
The second point to note about this study is that it is based on a small number of participants (79). Since these were then split into four categories - and most mothers were not depressed - that doesn't leave many in some of the categories. In fact as few as 6 in the 'only depressed' category. That is low.
While this study is really interesting, there's obviously some way to go yet - something that is fully acknowledged by the authors of the study but totally glossed over in the mainstream media reports.
Read the study's abstract
Labels: Development, Media
Music + Body Language = More Excitement
[Photo by elstonndanger]
Seeing a band live is a much more engaging experience than listening to a recording at home. But it's not just the atmosphere of a live event, it's also the singer's facial expressions and gestures which enhances our emotional experience. It's a rare singer whose face remains impassive as they sing. Think of jazz greats like Ella Fitzgerald, blues artists like B. B. King or pop acts like Michael Jackson. As they sing, their faces are conveying the emotion in the music, sometimes it seems, even struggling with the emotions. Part of the beauty of a live performance is seeing singers' faces as they interact with both the music, the other musicians and the audience. Their facial expressions often seem part of the music itself.
Facial expressions affect perception of music
In what way, then, do facial expressions while singing affect the perception of the music? There is a well-known phenomenon in psychology called the McGurk effect. This demonstrates that what listeners hear is profoundly affected by what they see. This suggests that singers' facial movements may have large effects on how we perceive music.
In a series of simple experiments, Thompson, Graham and Russo (2005) showed just how important the McGurk effect is when we are looking at singers, compared to when we only have the sound to go on.
Experiment 1: Some participants listened to blues legend B. B. King audio only, while others listened and watched him. Those who had both video and audio channels rated the level of 'dissonance' (when the music was negative or discordant) higher at points in which B. B. King winced his eyes, rolled his head back and shook his upper body.
Experiment 2: When trying to judge the pitch changes between notes, participants watching only the video almost did as well as those only listening to the audio. This is pretty impressive.
Experiment 3: Here some participants saw facial expressions relating to pitch changes that matched the audio, while others saw facial expressions that didn't. When the video didn't match the audio people were less accurate at judging pitch.
This is like an auditory McGurk effect. Because the video is suggesting the pitch goes down, people's average ratings of the pitch is lower despite the fact they can hear exactly how much the pitch is going up.
Experiment 4: This experiment used the fact that sung major intervals (series of notes) sound 'happy' and minor intervals sound 'sad'. In some conditions participants heard a 'happy' series of notes but saw a seemingly unhappy singer. In other conditions intervals were consistent with facial expressions. Participants rated the emotional component of the intervals more highly if audio and video were congruent.
Experiment 5: This time participants heard real musical performances, some while watching the accompanying video, some without. Here it was found that sometimes the visual channel added to the performance, and sometimes it reduced it.
These experiments are showing a variety of basic ways in which the facial expression of a performer can have a great influence over our perception of music. Facial expressions and body movements can change the pitch we hear, how much emotion we experience and can interact with the music in surprising ways.
That said, it's clear that not all the visual aspects of musical performance are good. Some body language that performers use may actively reduce our enjoyment of the music.
Culture and music
Modern technological innovations like the iPOD have further reinforced that separation. The coming of pop videos has created another layer of visual meaning to music. This layer, however, often has little to do with the facial expressions and hand gestures of the artist and more to do with the vision of video producers and directors. It's not often that a music video is a straight film of the band performing the track.
Not just listening, but also watching music
But perhaps we are turning the corner? With the iPOD video singers' visual performance has the potential to be reunited with the aural experience of music. Will people return to not just listening to music, but also watching it?
Certainly nowadays many musicians make the majority of their money from live performances of their music rather than from sales of their albums. Indeed some of them are even giving their albums away for free.
This may be part of a cultural recognition that music is more than just sound, it is an interaction between singer and audience, a big bit part of which is the artist's facial expressions and gestures. It's this interaction on which we are beginning to place a higher value.
» Read more from PsyBlog on the psychology of music, on the ways music influences mood and the personality secrets hidden in your MP3 player.
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Reference
Thompson, W.F., Graham, P., & Russo, F.A. (2005). Seeing music performance: Visual influences on perception and experience. Semiotica, 156, 203-227. [PDF of full article]
Does Semen Have Antidepressant Properties?
[Photo by gusset]
It's weird psychology study time again. If there was ever research guaranteed to make women suspicious of male researcher's motivations it's this one. Pointed out to me by a kind email correspondent (thank you!), this study tests a hypothesis put forward by Ney (1986) suggesting that prostaglandins, a component of semen, may actually be useful in treating depression.No condom = less depression?
Inspired by this, Gallup, Burch and Platek (2002) decided to look for a correlation between condom use and levels of depression in undergraduate women. Their headline results were as follows:
- Women having sex without condoms (often using alternative methods of contraception) were less depressed than those using condoms.
- Numbers of reported suicide attempts were proportional to consistency of condom use (less consistent use was associated with fewer suicide attempts).
- For those not using condoms, depression scores increased with the time since they last had sex.
While there's all sorts of objections flying around my head, this last one sounds particularly unconvincing. After all there could be all sorts of reasons why those who had sex more recently are less depressed, right?
But consider the fact that there was no relationship between depression scores and time since last having sex for those reported using condoms most or all of the time. Then this last finding is a little stronger.
A closer look does, however, reveal one contradictory result: that those who always used condoms had considerably lower depression scores than those who usually used condoms. This is the reverse of the headline trend.
More questions than answers
The authors are the first to admit that their data are preliminary, correlational and raise more questions than they answer. Like all good scientists they consider all sorts of alternative explanations for their findings. These include whether using an oral contraceptive, being in a relationship or taking part in high-risk activities might have an effect on depressive scores.
The authors also consider different ways of testing the hypothesis further - all of which would probably require much more work in convincing an ethics committee. In fact, this may well be one of those situations where the intrusive nature of a more conclusive study is just not warranted when balanced against the potential gain in knowledge.
Still, never say never. And if there's anything in it, no doubt we'll start seeing a new sight on the high street: 'Semen Cafes'. This time, for real.
» Read more weird psychology studies.
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References
Gallup, Burch, & Platek. (2002). Does Semen Have Antidepressant Properties? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31(3), 289-293.
Ney, P. G. (1986). The intravaginal absorption of male generated hormones and their possible effect on female behavior. Medical Hypotheses, 20, 221-231.
Labels: Relationships, Weird Psychology
This Week in Psychology
This week (well last week now!) from my psychology notepad...
The science of magic is always fascinating; this New York Times article is no exception. MindHacks has a little background on this.
The excellent BPS Research Digest is running a 'behind the news' series which gives links to the scholarly articles and lead authors on which news items are based. Two entries so far - long may it continue.
Talking of the BPS Digest, they also report research asking how many of us are 'morning people'.
A couple of years ago a psychologist named J. Michael Bailey wrote a book which suggested that some transgendered women are motivated to change genders by an 'erotic fascination'. Mixing Memory has links to all the right places, pointing out why all scientists should sit up and take note of this case.
Neuromarketing has an interesting article on whether women are better at sales than men.
The Situationist has an accessible summary of research on happiness by Dan Gilbert. I'm particularly liking the punchline of this advert they pointed me to:
The science of magic is always fascinating; this New York Times article is no exception. MindHacks has a little background on this.
The excellent BPS Research Digest is running a 'behind the news' series which gives links to the scholarly articles and lead authors on which news items are based. Two entries so far - long may it continue.
Talking of the BPS Digest, they also report research asking how many of us are 'morning people'.
A couple of years ago a psychologist named J. Michael Bailey wrote a book which suggested that some transgendered women are motivated to change genders by an 'erotic fascination'. Mixing Memory has links to all the right places, pointing out why all scientists should sit up and take note of this case.
Neuromarketing has an interesting article on whether women are better at sales than men.
The Situationist has an accessible summary of research on happiness by Dan Gilbert. I'm particularly liking the punchline of this advert they pointed me to:
Labels: This Week
Optimists and Realists Seen In Better Light Than Pessimists
[Photo by theXenon]
...although we're just as likely to provide support to optimists, pessimists and realists alike.Being an optimist is supposed to be good for health, success and happiness. But does optimism have a downside in that other people think you're self-deluded, mindless and just plain annoying? And on the flipside, how do people view pessimists? In particular, do we tend to shy away from helping out pessimists when they are in trouble?
Perceptions of optimists, pessimists and realists
In a recent study published in The Journal of Positive Psychology carried out by Vollmann, Renner and Weber (2007) participants listened to one of three conversation between two flatmates. In one the target person talked in an optimistic way about a moderately stressful relationship-related situation, in the second in a realistic way and in the third their response was pessimistic.
Afterwards participants were asked to provide a rating of how they evaluated the target's personality, how much they were attracted to the target and whether they would provide them with social support.
Here are the results:
1. Good news for optimists
Contrary to some people's view, optimists are generally seen in a positive light - so not much sign of optimists as 'mindless' and 'self-deluded'. But, if you're an optimist, this is exactly what you expected, right?
2. Bad news for pessimists
Sorry pessimists, it seems as if you are viewed in a more negative way than optimists and realists. Other people are probably slightly put off by your view of the world. In particular they rate the 'effectiveness' of pessimistic behaviour very poorly. But if you're a pessimist you probably suspected that, right?
3. Good news for pessimists
Despite their slightly more negative view, though, it seems people are just as likely to help out a pessimist who is in need.
4. Great news for realists
Realists, however, have the best of all worlds. They consistently get ratings equivalent to optimists, but their attitudes and behaviours are seen as more 'adequate' than both optimists and pessimists.
Widening the generalisability
A criticism of this study was that it only looked at perceptions of how a person reacted to a relationship-related stressful situation. So these results cannot be applied to different situations. However, in a further study, Vollmann, Renner and Weber (2007) widened the generalisability of the findings by looking at an achievement-related situation.
Here the experimental procedure was exactly the same except this time the target person that participants were listening to was talking about applying for a dream job. As before three different groups listened to an optimistic, pessimistic and realistic reaction to the situation.
Here are the results:
1. More bad news for pessimists
I'm sorry to say that pessimists came off even worse in this second 'achievement-related' study. The pessimistic target's behaviour was consistently perceived as significantly less adequate, less effective and even less interpersonally attractive than both optimists and realists.
2. Small silver lining
Despite these negative ratings, people are still just as likely to provide social support to a pessimist as they are to both optimists and realists.
3. Optimists and realists in the same boat (almost)
Again the ratings for the behaviour of the optimistic and realistic target were very similar with only the adequacy of the realistic target being seen as slightly higher than the optimist.
Do pessimists receive less social support?
This research was partly motivated by the finding that pessimists report receiving less social support than optimists. And as high social support is related to positive health outcomes, this is a worrying trend. This study suggests, though, that people are just as likely to offer social support to both optimists and pessimists. So, what's going on?
An intriguing possibility is suggested by Vollmann, Renner and Weber (2007). This is that optimists do not actually receive any greater levels of social support than pessimists - they just think they do. This in turn leads to more positive health-related outcomes. So, optimists might really be 'thinking themselves better'!
Bear in mind, though, that this last point is speculation and there is no evidence from the current study about the causal direction. Still, though, sounds pretty convincing doesn't it?
» Read more on positive psychology.
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Reference
Vollmann, M., Renner, B., & Weber, H., (2007) Optimism and social support: The providers' perspective. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2, 205-215
Labels: Positive Psychology
PsyBlog Translated into Chinese
I'm proud to announce that selected articles from PsyBlog are now being translated into Chinese. Psytopic.com is one of the top Chinese psychology websites available. It is run by psychology professors and students from the best universities in China.
You can now read the first article 'The Hidden Purpose of Chat-up Lines' in Chinese and the original English.
Best wishes to everyone at Psytopic which looks like a great resource.
Labels: Site News
What is Courage?
[Photo by DeVo]
Positive psychology research asks whether experiencing fear is a central component of courage. Imagine you are in this situation:
"I was sitting in a Tube carriage next to an attractive young woman who was reading a magazine. There was a guy sitting opposite me, who was kind of Neanderthal [and starts hassling the woman sat next to me].This story is from BBC News and happened to one of the reporters. And although it is a relatively extreme example, most of us have seen something comparable in public. And most people would also agree that it would take considerable courage to get involved in a situation like this.
Anyway, all the passengers on the Tube were aware of this. The Tube stops. He gets out of the doors - the thug. He walks off down the platform, we're all quite happy he's gone. Another passenger flips him a V-sign. The doors have closed, by the way, when he does this. And then the disaster happens - the doors reopen.
The thug runs back in. He's six foot three, his muscles are so big they're flexing against the Tube glass, and he just starts beating seven bells out of this fellow. And actually when you see physical violence or are on the receiving end of it, it's very very nasty.
His fist went into the side of his head, blood came out, another fist, the guy goes down on the carriage floor, and the thug walks off very happy with himself. And I did nothing. The carriage was pretty full. But none of us did anything. It was terrible."
But what if the person getting involved is a police officer, or a person trained in these situations? Does that make them less courageous? What, then, is courage?
Writers and philosophers have long been interested in this question. One of the best, and most succinct, suggestions comes from Ernest Hemingway; that courage is "grace under pressure".
But being psychologists we need something with a little more science behind it.
What is courage?
To find out what courage is, Rate et al. (2007) asked a group of students at Yale University and the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA). They came up with a long list of items which were then statistically grouped into the following three categories or types of courage:
1. Self-focussed response to affect and external circumstance. This category included: 'enduring a tough situation', 'remaining focussed in a high-stress environment' and 'does not give in to fear when making decisions'.
2. Non-physical/social oriented acts. This category included: 'stands up to unjust social practices because of what one thinks right', 'maintains honesty no matter others' opinions' and 'demonstrates integrity'.
3. Selfless sacrifice/risk. This category included items mostly meaning: 'risks to protect others'.
These results and a further study and statistical tests found more evidence for these categories.
Evaluating courage
So this tells us what people generally think courage is, but what about how they use these definitions to evaluate whether other people are courageous? To find this out, Rate et al. (2007) gave 169 participants a series of 33 short stories. Each of these vignettes were designed to vary along four dimensions that were derived from the previous two studies:
- Noble/good act,
- Intentionality/deliberation,
- Known substantial personal risk,
- Presence of personal fear.
"Mark (Julie) was surfing off the coast of the Florida panhandle when he witnesses a 14-year old girl being attacked by a tiger shark. The young victim was in severe agony as she screamed for help. Although in stunned disbelief and visibly shaken by what he was witnessing, Mark immediately began paddling as hard and as quickly as he could to reach the girl. Mark began to hit, beat, and kick the tiger shark to ward off further attacks. He was able to beat back the 7-foot attacker. He then pulled the girl onto the surfboard and paddled to shore." (Rate et al. 2007, p. 92)The reason for the bracketed 'Julie' is that a female protagonist was presented to half the participants to see if gender made any difference to perceptions of courage. It didn't - people had the same standards for both men and women.
What is the role of fear in courage?
Three of the four dimensions on which the vignettes varied predicted courage, but personal fear did not. This means that noble/good act, intentionality/deliberation and substantial personal risk are all important in evaluating courage in another - but personal fear is not.
This is an interesting finding because many views of courage include the idea that it incorporates dealing with personal fear. The authors, however, suggest the failure to find personal fear contributing to evaluations of courage is down to methodological problems.
The debate about whether courage includes fear has a long pedigree, going back to Plato and Aristotle (Rate et al., 2007). Aristotle thought actually feeling fear was integral to courage, whereas Plato argued that it was a rational understanding of fear instead of actually feeling it that was important.
Sample criticism
The sample used here had a good point and a bad point. The good point was that half the group came from USAFA, a mostly male, conservative/traditional group and the other half came from Yale, a female biased, liberal group. Despite this contrast there were no differences in the way courage was viewed.
The bad point was that both are elite institutions not representative of the whole population so future research needs to examine a more stratified sample.
Read more on positive psychology: 3 Reasons Life is Worth Living From Positive Psychology.
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References
Rate, C. R., Clarke, J. A., Lindsay, D. R., Sternberg, R. J. (2007). Implicit theories of courage. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2(2), 80-98.
Labels: Positive Psychology
3 Reasons Life is Worth Living From Positive Psychology
[Photo by estherase]
For decades psychologists were almost exclusively concerned with alleviating mental distress. No bad thing of course - psychological knowledge has contributed to great strides in the treatment and understanding of mental illness. But to only study pathology, damage and weakness in humanity is to leave out half the picture. What about human strengths, human virtues and human excellence - surely these are worth studying too? In the last few decades the positive psychology movement has recognised this need for research into what makes us happy, what makes us excel and how these things might be enhanced. Acknowledging this important movement, over the coming weeks PsyBlog will be looking at some of the research emerging from this area. We start with three reasons life is worth living to whet your appetite.
1. Evolution drives us towards happiness.
Imagine humans had never discovered sport. The idea of 'sport' is a concept that has evolved over human history to mean a particular type of competition that's a bit like war, but in which (generally) no one dies (this analogy applies better to some sports than others!).
Now think about writing, or cooking or cinema or many other things that most of us enjoy doing or consuming. These were not invented in their totality by one person - they evolved. Each started off in relatively primitive guises and have now evolved to their current state of sophistication. And they'll certainly go on evolving from here.
The 'ideas' involved in each of these pursuits have been technically referred to as 'memes'. Like a gene, only for ideas. The meme, therefore, is a unit of cultural information that travels from one person to the next, living in the mind from where it can mutate and replicate or die out.
What I'm driving at is that effectively, over time humans have naturally selected memes that tend to bring about maximal experience, and we will continue to do so (Massimini & Delle Fave, 2000).
Each of us then plays a part, however small, in evolving new and engrossing forms of maximal experience.
2. Optimism is good for you
The British national character is pretty cynical and I sometimes think optimism is viewed as a form of mental illness. British people like to say things like: "If I imagine the worst then I won't be disappointed". Oh dear. It's not just the British that are down on optimism - many people often think optimists are unrealistic and self-deluding.
Conversely much of the research on optimism suggests how good it is for you: it may protect us from illness, it puts us in a better mood; while optimists are more likely to be successful and to persevere at a task. There's even a fantastic series of studies showing that people higher in hope and optimism are more likely to seek out unfavourable information about their disease. So not only do they expect a better outcome, they're actually better informed.
3. The search for excellence
Human excellence comes in many forms. It can refer to how well children do in school, especially those who are gifted. Indeed, unlike the stereotypical view of gifted children as outcasts and freaks, research is finding they are frequently well-adjusted and enjoy supportive family environments.
It can apply to the creativity of artists which can be spurred by the most unusual of circumstances. Simonton (2000) finds that the creativity of artists may be enhanced in the aftermath of nationalistic revolts against oppressive regimes.
Finally, research has recently been revived into that most ancient of virtues: wisdom. Some fascinating findings are currently coming out of the 'Berlin wisdom paradigm'. Amongst these are that high levels of wisdom appear to be rare, wisdom appears in late adolescence and early adulthood and age doesn't seem to be the sole, or even main, requisite for wisdom.
More to come...
And if this taster of what positive psychology is all about doesn't make you feel optimistic, then do not fear, my task has only just begun! In future posts I'll be taking a closer at more positive psychology research.
If you can't wait until then, check out the Positive Psychology Center at the University of Pennsylvania which has loads more to keep you going.
This post is largely based on research reported by Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000) [Word Doc, 87Kb].
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References
Massimini, F., & Delle Fave, A. (2000). Individual development in a bio-cultural perspective. American Psychologist, 55(1), 24-33.
Seligman, M. E., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology. An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5-14.
Simonton, D. K. (2000). Cognitive, Personal, Developmental, and Social Aspects. American Psychologist, 1, 151-158.
Labels: Positive Psychology
Soviet Psychiatry | Miserable Middle-Aged Men | Satisfied Hairdressers | Jury Psychology
This week, from my psychology notebook...
The Telegraph has a story suggesting the Russian psychiatric system may be returning to the abusive practices common during Soviet times. The article, called 'Labelled mad for daring to criticise the Kremlin', tells the story of Larisa Arap who has been forcibly treated after publicising systematic abuses of patients at a clinic where she has been held. The Telegraph's leader column goes on to say:
BBC News reports that 'middle-aged men are the most miserable'. How, pray, did our resourceful journos come to this conclusion? Well, every few years in the UK, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs run a survey to measure people's attitudes towards the environment. It contains questions about transport, energy and water efficiency, recycling and so on. Also, tacked on to the end are a few questions about life satisfaction.
And it's from these that BBC News comes up with the idea that middle-aged men are the 'most miserable'. Actually the survey question is couched in positive terms and asks about satisfaction with life. The supposedly 'miserable' middle-aged men still scored on average 6.8 out of 10 on the scale compared with 7.7 for those over 65. Headlining the article in this way is obviously completely misleading.
A better question - and this survey only really raises more questions - would be why those over 65 are the most satisfied with life. Could this have something to do with ageing and the positivity effect?
The full survey from which these results are taken is not published until September 2007 but preliminary results are available.
Moving from life satisfaction to job satisfaction there is evidence from the Workplace Employment Relations Survey (UK) that hairdressers are the second most satisfied occupational group. They are behind only highly paid managers.
Published in the Industrial Relations Journal, the study also finds that computer jobs are, apparently, shedding their erstwhile sexiness and IT workers are heading down the list. Teachers, on the other hand, are on the way up. There's an entertaining discussion of these findings on the Radio 4 programme 'Thinking Allowed'.
Thanks to a kind post by Emma at the Deception Blog, I came across a great blog about juries and jury trials. The author, Anne Reed, is a trial lawyer and jury consultant and she often writes about fascinating aspects of jury psychology. In a recent series of 'best of' posts, Anne asks how beauty affects the jury (and part 2) whether the jurors are asleep and examines the biases that may affect jury selection.
Anne is also the curator of the 'The American Gallery of Juror Art'. This contains 'art done by actual jurors while on actual jury duty'. Proof positive that jury duty can be pretty tedious.
[Brain tattoo picture above via MindHacks.]
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Soviet psychiatry
The Telegraph has a story suggesting the Russian psychiatric system may be returning to the abusive practices common during Soviet times. The article, called 'Labelled mad for daring to criticise the Kremlin', tells the story of Larisa Arap who has been forcibly treated after publicising systematic abuses of patients at a clinic where she has been held. The Telegraph's leader column goes on to say:
"Things are different in modern Russia, where, as we report in horrifying detail today, it takes only modest influence to secure the incarceration and chemical torture of a business rival, wealthy relative or prosecution witness, and where the sectioning of citizens hostile to the Kremlin seems set to become once more a fact of political life."
Miserable middle-aged men?
BBC News reports that 'middle-aged men are the most miserable'. How, pray, did our resourceful journos come to this conclusion? Well, every few years in the UK, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs run a survey to measure people's attitudes towards the environment. It contains questions about transport, energy and water efficiency, recycling and so on. Also, tacked on to the end are a few questions about life satisfaction.
And it's from these that BBC News comes up with the idea that middle-aged men are the 'most miserable'. Actually the survey question is couched in positive terms and asks about satisfaction with life. The supposedly 'miserable' middle-aged men still scored on average 6.8 out of 10 on the scale compared with 7.7 for those over 65. Headlining the article in this way is obviously completely misleading.
A better question - and this survey only really raises more questions - would be why those over 65 are the most satisfied with life. Could this have something to do with ageing and the positivity effect?
The full survey from which these results are taken is not published until September 2007 but preliminary results are available.
Hairdressers second most satisfied
Moving from life satisfaction to job satisfaction there is evidence from the Workplace Employment Relations Survey (UK) that hairdressers are the second most satisfied occupational group. They are behind only highly paid managers.
Published in the Industrial Relations Journal, the study also finds that computer jobs are, apparently, shedding their erstwhile sexiness and IT workers are heading down the list. Teachers, on the other hand, are on the way up. There's an entertaining discussion of these findings on the Radio 4 programme 'Thinking Allowed'.
Jury psychology
Thanks to a kind post by Emma at the Deception Blog, I came across a great blog about juries and jury trials. The author, Anne Reed, is a trial lawyer and jury consultant and she often writes about fascinating aspects of jury psychology. In a recent series of 'best of' posts, Anne asks how beauty affects the jury (and part 2) whether the jurors are asleep and examines the biases that may affect jury selection.
Anne is also the curator of the 'The American Gallery of Juror Art'. This contains 'art done by actual jurors while on actual jury duty'. Proof positive that jury duty can be pretty tedious.
[Brain tattoo picture above via MindHacks.]
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Labels: This Week
Does 'Peer Review' Mean Anything to You?
[Photo by marinegirl]
A new website, bpr3.org, has been set up to highlight peer reviewed research - the process by which academics check each other's work.A discussion about 'peer review' is ongoing over at Cognitive Daily suggesting science bloggers should use an icon to indicate when they are discussing peer reviewed research. Peer review is simply the system academics use for checking each other's work. Before research is published in peer reviewed journals it gets sent to other experts in the field to be checked. Peer review is seen as the academic gold standard.
Whether you realise or not, almost all the research I cover here on PsyBlog is peer reviewed. That's simply because most academic journals I use are peer reviewed. I rely on the reference section at the end of each post to highlight the fact that I'm reporting reputable scientific research. For example, you can see a study has been published in Psychological Science so you know it has been properly checked - or at least it should have been(!).
Dave Munger at Cognitive Daily (and others) argue that it would be useful for readers to see when bloggers are discussing peer-reviewed research. To this end they have set up a website aimed at producing a logo for science bloggers to display. More than that, they aim to aggregate peer-reviewed research so that it can be accessed on one site.
Dave argues this site and logo will help to distinguish peer-reviewed research from 'scholarship by press release' - the process by which many journalists (and bloggers) simply regurgitate press releases without looking at the original research.
Cabiblog, meanwhile, points out that some fantastic, rigorous scientific research is published outside peer reviewed journals.
Post your views
I'd be very interested in your views on this. I know many of you are academics and students and so will be familiar with, or at least aware of, the peer review process. But what about those who aren't familiar with this - does a reference section convince you the research is kosher? Does the phrase 'peer review' mean anything to you?
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Effectiveness of Mutual Support Groups
In stressful times we can all do with a little help from our friends. Sometimes, though, our friends cannot provide - or we do not want to ask for - the kind of support required. Mutual support groups based around shared topics such as cancer or addictions have grown rapidly to meet this need. But, can mutual support groups really help people recover from mental health problems? A small but growing body of research suggests they can.
Some of the best evidence comes from a randomised comparison of mutual support group with cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) (Bright, Baker & Neimeyer, 1999). This study found that mutual support groups were generally just as effective as trained therapists at alleviating moderate levels of depression.
People with serious mental health problems taking part in a mutual support group were examined by Roberts et al. (1999). They found that participants showed improved psychosocial adjustment over the course of the study. Not only this, but those who helped others were more likely to improve themselves. This is a demonstration of the 'helper therapy' principle - the idea that it is therapeutic for us to help others.
A study by Marmar et al. (1988) looked at women suffering from unresolved grief from the death of their husbands. It compared a mutual support group with brief dynamic psychotherapy. The results showed that both of these treatment were similarly effective.
While this is only a sample of some of the published studies, there is certainly good evidence emerging for the effectiveness of mutual support groups. Why is this important? Mutual support groups are generally much cheaper than one-on-one therapy with a trained professional. The fact that outcomes are equivalent suggests they provide a great alternative.
These types of studies are also particularly important as they tend to show how much helping others can be beneficial. We might assume that the benefits of mutual support are in the receiving, but it does seem that giving support is also a healing activity.
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References
Bright, J.I., Baker, K.D., & Neimeyer, R.A. (1999). Professional and paraprofessional group treatments for depression: a comparison of cognitive-behavioral and mutual support interventions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67(4), 491-501.
Marmar, C.R., Horowitz, M.J., Weiss, D.S., Wilner, N.R., & Kaltreider, N.B. (1988). A controlled trial of brief psychotherapy and mutual-help group treatment of conjugal bereavement. Am J Psychiatry, 145(2), 203-9.
Roberts, L. J., Salem, D., Rappaport, J., Toro, P. A., Luke, D. A., & Seidman, E. (1999). Giving and Receiving Help: Interpersonal Transactions in Mutual-Help Meetings and Psychosocial Adjustment of Members. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27(6), 841-868.
Depression
Some of the best evidence comes from a randomised comparison of mutual support group with cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) (Bright, Baker & Neimeyer, 1999). This study found that mutual support groups were generally just as effective as trained therapists at alleviating moderate levels of depression.
Chronic mental illness
People with serious mental health problems taking part in a mutual support group were examined by Roberts et al. (1999). They found that participants showed improved psychosocial adjustment over the course of the study. Not only this, but those who helped others were more likely to improve themselves. This is a demonstration of the 'helper therapy' principle - the idea that it is therapeutic for us to help others.
Bereavement
A study by Marmar et al. (1988) looked at women suffering from unresolved grief from the death of their husbands. It compared a mutual support group with brief dynamic psychotherapy. The results showed that both of these treatment were similarly effective.
Importance of mutual support
While this is only a sample of some of the published studies, there is certainly good evidence emerging for the effectiveness of mutual support groups. Why is this important? Mutual support groups are generally much cheaper than one-on-one therapy with a trained professional. The fact that outcomes are equivalent suggests they provide a great alternative.
These types of studies are also particularly important as they tend to show how much helping others can be beneficial. We might assume that the benefits of mutual support are in the receiving, but it does seem that giving support is also a healing activity.
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References
Bright, J.I., Baker, K.D., & Neimeyer, R.A. (1999). Professional and paraprofessional group treatments for depression: a comparison of cognitive-behavioral and mutual support interventions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67(4), 491-501.
Marmar, C.R., Horowitz, M.J., Weiss, D.S., Wilner, N.R., & Kaltreider, N.B. (1988). A controlled trial of brief psychotherapy and mutual-help group treatment of conjugal bereavement. Am J Psychiatry, 145(2), 203-9.
Roberts, L. J., Salem, D., Rappaport, J., Toro, P. A., Luke, D. A., & Seidman, E. (1999). Giving and Receiving Help: Interpersonal Transactions in Mutual-Help Meetings and Psychosocial Adjustment of Members. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27(6), 841-868.
Labels: Depression
How the Mind Works by Steven Pinker (Book Review)
Right from the outset Steven Pinker, a Professor of Psychology at Harvard University, is apologising for the title of his book: 'How the Mind Works'. We do not yet know how the mind works, he explains. The ideas contained in his book are not, he admits, his own but culled from various other fields. But this is rather false modesty as reading on it soon becomes clear Pinker does indeed intend to tell us how the mind works, albeit one particular version.His story starts with the computational model of the mind: the idea common in cognitive science that the mind can be likened to an information processing device. Pinker considers some of the criticisms of this approach but ultimately provides a robust argument for its utility.
Pinker's story then turns to evolution. How is it, he asks, that we have developed such huge brains in the first place? He explains that during our long evolution into homo sapiens sapiens, we have come to inhabit the 'cognitive niche' - survival through the use of our brains to make tools and plans to achieve particular goals.
This brings us up to date and Pinker now turns to vision, the evolution of the eye and the functioning of cognitive systems, the power of imagery in our reality. Then on to thinking and reasoning, the way we calculate probabilities, what we know about other people's minds. Then the emotions, then our families and personalities and finally to 'the meaning of life'.
Birds-eye view of the mind
You sense Pinker could easily have written a book 10 times the size of this 600-odd page work. This race to include so many aspects of psychology is, inevitably, both the book's strength and its weakness. For those who prefer more in-depth discussion it may prove an irritant. But for those, like me, who enjoy the birds-eye view and rush of ideas, it will prove a joy.
Overall, it's hard to avoid being enthralled by both Pinker's writing and his imagination. This book might be more accurately titled 'How Steven Pinker's Mind Works', but it still acquits itself well. Skipping from one analogy to another, surfing ideas, threading together intellectual insights; Pinker's style is direct, straightforward and accessible and yet there is always one more corner to turn, one more leap of the imagination that keeps him just out of reach. A good trick if you can do it.
» Buy 'How the Mind Works' from Amazon.com
or at Amazon.co.uk.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Labels: Book Reviews
The Hidden Purpose of Chat-up Lines
[Photo by Farfarm]
New research suggests men's choice of chat-up line may help quickly select for women with particular personalities.When it comes to the human mating game, men are often portrayed as having little power or guile. Research finds it is women that control early interactions, from first signalling the man to approach to deciding whether to engage in sex. One area in which men are popularly seen as especially inept is in their choice of chat-up lines. Leading the field in crass openings are sexually-loaded remarks.
Indeed, a study by Chris Bale from the University of Central Lancashire found that sexually-loaded remarks were the type of openers least likely to lead to further interaction (Bale, 2006). Which begs the question: why do men still use them?
Chat-up lines as selection tool
An ingeniously simple answer is suggested by both Bale (2006) and Cooper et al. (2007), with some evidence to back it up. Chat-up lines may be a way for men to select for a particular type of woman. In other words, men using sexually-loaded remarks are looking for a certain type of woman (an easy one). Similarly, at the other end of the scale, men who use character-revealing or culture-based openers are probably trying to show they are a good mate looking for a long-term partner.
That's the theory and here's how Cooper and colleagues searched for evidence.
The study first asked participants to consider a series of scenarios in which men tried to strike up a conversation with a woman. In each the man used a different type of approach. Participants were then asked to rate how likely it was the conversation would continue on the basis of that opener.
These 'lines' were collated from a variety of sources and clustered into the following categories:
- Good mate - these included comments that made reference to culture, character or wealth. E.g. "You know I saw this fantastic piece in the Tate Modern".
- Compliments. E.g. "You remind me of a parking ticket because you've got fine written all over you." (Please. No!)
- Sex. E.g. "I may not be Fred Flintstone, but I can sure make your bedrock." (Club to the head.)
- Humour. "Can I buy you an island?" (Nice.)
So, now we know, generally speaking, how our female participants react to these four broad types of male approaches. Next we need to find out what types of men the female participants prefer.
Four types of men
For this they complete the Dating Partner Preference Test. An analysis of these results suggests women see men as generally falling into one of four types:
- Nice guy. Yes, he's helpful, he's considerate, he's appreciative. He's a puppy.
- Provider. Man go into woods, kill pig. Bring fire. Build log cabin. All warm and fed.
- Leader. He's chatty, confident and strong-willed - a captain of your heart?
- Bad mate. Fickle, conceited, dependent. All wrong for you. But there's something about him...
Along with these vignettes and the Dating Partner Preference Test, participants were asked to fill in personality measures of their psychoticism (tendency for inappropriate emotional responses and recklessness), extraversion (being outgoing, gregarious, externally oriented) and neuroticism (the tendency to experience negative emotional states). Now we've got all the information we need to see if there's any connection.
Results
Looking at the correlations shows there is support for the idea that chat-up lines select for women with particular personalities.
- Women high in extraversion preferred the male 'leaders'.
- Women high in neuroticism preferred the 'nice guys'.
- Women high in psychoticism rejected 'nice guys', preferring the 'bad mate'.
It does seem, then, that the type of chat-up lines men choose does have a measurable effect on the types of women who respond to them. This can effectively allow men to make a quick assessment of a woman's personality by their response to a particular type of approach. Those looking for a 'bad mate' might use a sexually-loaded remark or a compliment, while those wanting an extrovert should use a joke.
Men's perceptions of women's lines
I have focussed on women's perceptions of male chat-up lines as in most cultures it's mostly the men using the lines, although this is changing. Perhaps to reflect this men's perceptions of women's chat-up lines were also included in this study.
The results for men's perceptions showed that in comparison to women, men were more likely to prefer chat-up lines involving sex (surprise surprise!) as opposed to women who preferred humour. Men also tended to be worse than women at judging what types of chat-up lines women prefer. The types of chat-up lines whose effectiveness was under-estimated by men were those involving offers of help to women, handing control of the interaction to women and (subtly) displaying wealth (surprise surprise!).
Caution
The correlations seen between personality measures and ratings of chat-up lines were not particularly high (between 0.2 to 0.4). This means that only a small proportion of the change in personality measures is associated with the chat-up lines (between 4% and 16%). So, it's far from the only thing affecting chat-up line responses, but there is still some effect.
» Read more on the psychology of relationships.
» If you enjoyed this post, subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
References
Cooper, M., O'Donnell, D., Caryl, P. G., Morrison, M., & Bale, C. (2007) Chat-up lines as male displays: Effects of content, sex, and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1075-1085
Bale, C., Morrison, R., & Caryl, P. G. (2006). Chat-up lines as male sexual displays. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 655-664.
Labels: Relationships
The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat by Oliver Sacks (Review)
This review is the first in a new series on my favourite psychological books.
One book almost everyone interested in psychology will enjoy is Oliver Sack's 'The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat'. Sacks, a neurologist by training, describes some of the fascinating patients he has treated over the years. From the eponymous Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat, through The Man Who Fell out of Bed, The Lost Mariner and The Dog Beneath the Skin, each chapter tells the story of ordinary human experience touched by unusual brain diseases.
Mercifully the narrative is devoid of medical terminology as what Sacks is most interested in is the patient's perspective on the world. As a result the reader gains personal, subjective insight into the inability to recognise objects (visual agnosia), the experience of a dense amnesia stretching back decades (Korsakov's), what it feels like to be completely disembodied and many other conditions.
Sacks captures the effects of damage to the brain not by reducing it to diagnoses and categories, but by expanding it to include all the vagaries of the individual. This book is not so much a series of case notes as a collection of parables about the brain.
Each one shows us what certain deficits or excesses can do to our experience - how it can be reduced in one dimension and rapidly expanded in another. Each, ever so gently suggesting that what we take for granted as reality is really just one more dream our brains have manufactured.
Above all, people's stories - for they are stories about real people - are all told with warmth; a kind, philosophical eye, searching not for what has been lost, but for what has been added. A scientist's attention to detail without the stereotypical austerity.
Sacks is most concerned with finding out what his patients can do, what they enjoy, what it is possible for them to get out of life. He realises their personhood is vital to understanding their condition. Sacks is engaged in what he refers to as the 'neurology of identity'.
It's this centrality of human experience and identity that makes this book such a rewarding and frequently touching read.
» Buy The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat from Amazon.com
or at Amazon.co.uk
.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
One book almost everyone interested in psychology will enjoy is Oliver Sack's 'The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat'. Sacks, a neurologist by training, describes some of the fascinating patients he has treated over the years. From the eponymous Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat, through The Man Who Fell out of Bed, The Lost Mariner and The Dog Beneath the Skin, each chapter tells the story of ordinary human experience touched by unusual brain diseases.Mercifully the narrative is devoid of medical terminology as what Sacks is most interested in is the patient's perspective on the world. As a result the reader gains personal, subjective insight into the inability to recognise objects (visual agnosia), the experience of a dense amnesia stretching back decades (Korsakov's), what it feels like to be completely disembodied and many other conditions.
Sacks captures the effects of damage to the brain not by reducing it to diagnoses and categories, but by expanding it to include all the vagaries of the individual. This book is not so much a series of case notes as a collection of parables about the brain.
Each one shows us what certain deficits or excesses can do to our experience - how it can be reduced in one dimension and rapidly expanded in another. Each, ever so gently suggesting that what we take for granted as reality is really just one more dream our brains have manufactured.
Real stories, real people
Above all, people's stories - for they are stories about real people - are all told with warmth; a kind, philosophical eye, searching not for what has been lost, but for what has been added. A scientist's attention to detail without the stereotypical austerity.
Sacks is most concerned with finding out what his patients can do, what they enjoy, what it is possible for them to get out of life. He realises their personhood is vital to understanding their condition. Sacks is engaged in what he refers to as the 'neurology of identity'.
It's this centrality of human experience and identity that makes this book such a rewarding and frequently touching read.
» Buy The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat from Amazon.com
or at Amazon.co.uk.Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Labels: Book Reviews
Group Therapy Online | Eye Movement Coupling | Macho Men Still Untrustworthy
This week, from my psychology notebook...
Can group therapy work over the internet? A new study published in Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics suggests it can be useful in some circumstances. Golkaramnay et al. (2007) examined its effectiveness on those who had been discharged after receiving inpatient care. The research aimed to find out if gains made during intensive inpatient care could be maintained once patients had been discharged.
The controlled study, carried out over 15 weeks, had a group meeting online for 90 minutes each week to participate in group internet chat therapy. Twelve months after discharge, patients were at a lower risk of a negative outcome compared to the control group (24.7% versus 38.5%).
This looks like an extremely cost-effective way of improving outpatient care. However, it does mean that patients need to be familiar and comfortable with internet chat, which may not be for everybody.
Studies on the nonverbal aspects of conversations are fascinating. I recently reported how achieving rapport with another person is affected by expressivity, flow and co-ordination. Here's another piece of research in a similar vein reported by Cognitive Daily describing the coupling of eye movements during dialogue.
Another study tells us that women see macho men as dominant, but as a bad choice for long-term relationships. Published in Personality and Individual Differences, the study looked at the personality characteristics associated with masculine and feminine male faces.
I'm not confident these types of studies really tell us much, if anything. How often do you choose a partner or make a judgement about their suitability based solely on looking at their face? Yes, people do make judgements on the basis of appearance, but these are surely rapidly adjusted with more experience of that person. I'd be more interested to find out to what extent judgements about faces are open to later revision.
The psychology of product packaging had me intrigued this week. Packaging can't help but set up expectations about the contents - much like the research I reported on how expectations about wine affect food consumption. The packaging of alcohol, in particular, has important effects on people's subjective ratings of palatability. Gates et al. (2007) found that young people found a drink more palatable when its packaging revealed it to be a Bacardi Breezer than when it was an anonymous drink.
Rather than buy a phone with bigger buttons, a man had his thumbs surgically 'whittled' down so he could use his iPhone.
Now, that really shows you the power of marketing and packaging!
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Can group therapy work over the internet? A new study published in Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics suggests it can be useful in some circumstances. Golkaramnay et al. (2007) examined its effectiveness on those who had been discharged after receiving inpatient care. The research aimed to find out if gains made during intensive inpatient care could be maintained once patients had been discharged.
The controlled study, carried out over 15 weeks, had a group meeting online for 90 minutes each week to participate in group internet chat therapy. Twelve months after discharge, patients were at a lower risk of a negative outcome compared to the control group (24.7% versus 38.5%).
This looks like an extremely cost-effective way of improving outpatient care. However, it does mean that patients need to be familiar and comfortable with internet chat, which may not be for everybody.
Studies on the nonverbal aspects of conversations are fascinating. I recently reported how achieving rapport with another person is affected by expressivity, flow and co-ordination. Here's another piece of research in a similar vein reported by Cognitive Daily describing the coupling of eye movements during dialogue.
Another study tells us that women see macho men as dominant, but as a bad choice for long-term relationships. Published in Personality and Individual Differences, the study looked at the personality characteristics associated with masculine and feminine male faces.
I'm not confident these types of studies really tell us much, if anything. How often do you choose a partner or make a judgement about their suitability based solely on looking at their face? Yes, people do make judgements on the basis of appearance, but these are surely rapidly adjusted with more experience of that person. I'd be more interested to find out to what extent judgements about faces are open to later revision.
The psychology of product packaging had me intrigued this week. Packaging can't help but set up expectations about the contents - much like the research I reported on how expectations about wine affect food consumption. The packaging of alcohol, in particular, has important effects on people's subjective ratings of palatability. Gates et al. (2007) found that young people found a drink more palatable when its packaging revealed it to be a Bacardi Breezer than when it was an anonymous drink.
And finally...
Rather than buy a phone with bigger buttons, a man had his thumbs surgically 'whittled' down so he could use his iPhone.
Now, that really shows you the power of marketing and packaging!
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Labels: This Week
Is Marriage Dying? No. (Well, Probably Not)
[Photo by Jeff Belmonte]
What does the future hold for the institution of marriage? I ask because we're constantly hearing about the 'deinstitutionalisation' of marriage. Marriage no longer occupies the central, solid role it once did, divorce is on the rise and people are getting married later. All these seem to point to a weakening of marriage in many Western societies. So, how will marriage be viewed in the future? As a quaint custom fast dying out whose proponents can only be found amongst die-hard traditionalists? As an indicator of advanced age, social backwardness and constriction? In short: is marriage dying?
Clue to marriage's future
Well, we'll have to wait and see, but a clue about the future of marriage comes from a new study published in the Journal of Marriage and Family. Manning, Longmore and Giordano (2007) asked adolescents whether they expected to get married in the future and/or whether they saw themselves engaging in marriage's ambiguous rival: cohabitation. And perhaps the results might surprise those who feel marriage is on the long slide to oblivion.
First you need to know who the participants were before you can judge the results. They were kids from the 7th, 9th and 11th grades (that's 12, 14 and 16 year-olds respectively) from Lucas County, Ohio in the US. This is a mostly urban, metropolitan environment. Bear in mind that it can be difficult to generalise these findings to other areas, although they are useful indicators.
Surprisingly, then, adolescents expected it was much more likely they would marry than they would cohabit. Here are some of the headline findings for marriage:
- 76% of adolescents expected to marry in the future (probably or definitely).
- 19% thought it 'a little' or 'somewhat likely' they would marry.
- 5% thought they would never marry.
And for cohabitation:
- 30% expected to cohabit (probably or definitely).
- 26% thought it 'somewhat likely' they would cohabit.
- 21% said there was 'a little' chance they would cohabit.
- 23% expected never to cohabit.
We can also make some inferences from the patterns of adolescent's responses. For example, half the adolescents thought they would cohabit and marry at some point. Also, only very few adolescents thought they would cohabit but never marry.
There were a number of factors that affected whether young people thought they would marry. For example those from single-parent families thought themselves less likely to marry, as did those from ethnic minorities and those who had never dated.
Social expectations
While these results seem positive for the institution of marriage, my main reservation is that the adolescents, especially the younger ones, are simply answering how they think they are supposed to be answering. Does a 12 year-old really know what it means to cohabit or to get married? Perhaps this study is telling us more about existing social norms than it is about the future of marriage itself.
That said, if young people still think marriage is important, then it probably still is. And it will probably continue to be important for quite some time.
Read more on the psychology of relationships.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Reference
Manning, W.D., Longmore, M.A., & Giordano, P.C. (2007). The Changing Institution of Marriage: Adolescents Expectations to Cohabit and to Marry. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69(3), 559-575.
Labels: Relationships
'Good' Wine Increases Food Consumption by 12%
Our expectations about the world have all sorts of knock-on effects for how we behave. Take something as simple as eating and drinking. If I give you a glass of wine, telling you to expect a taste-explosion, unless you're an expert, you're likely to experience it as being tastier than if I told you it was some cheap rancid rubbish I had lying around.
Not only that, this expectation might well be passed on to other aspects of your behaviour, such as the amount of accompanying food you eat. Don't believe me? Check out this experiment by Wansink, Payne and North (2007).
Thirty-nine unknowing participants sat down to a meal in a University restaurant. Half were served a glass of wine labelled as from California, the other half saw labels from North Dakota. A previous study had found that people had greater quality expectations of wine from California than that from North Dakota.
Actually both groups had been served the same wine, a Charles Shaw Cabernet Sauvignon costing $2.99. All were then served the same three-course meal with the weight of food carefully measured before and after they had eaten.
By measuring the difference, the researchers found that those served wine they thought was from California ate 12% more than those who thought their wine was from North Dakota.
So it seems that expectations of wine quality can affect how much food we eat.
But, what else could explain this difference in the amount eaten apart from the wine? Perhaps it was the social groups at each table? After all, you're likely to eat more if you're sat with other people who are wolfing it down, and less if others are all prodding their food as if it were poisonous.
To test this possibility, the authors carried out statistical tests to compare between tables. They reasoned that if social groupings were causing this difference then the tables at which participants sat would be a better predictor of the amount of food eaten than perceptions about the wine. But, again, it was perceptions about the wine that better predicted the amount of food eaten, not social groupings.
Interestingly, although perceptions about wine increased the amount of food eaten, they didn't increase the amount of the actual wine that was drunk. Surely, on average, diners would drink more of the wine they perceived as higher quality? The authors argue, however, that because all diners were restricted to a single glass, they didn't have the opportunity. So that's a question for future research.
What mechanism might, then, connect expectations about wine with eating more food? Here's three the authors offer:
1. It could be that expectations about wine 'leak across' to the food: if the wine is good, the food should be good as well. So more chomping.
2. More drinking the 'tasty' wine decreases self-restraint leading to more chomping.
3. Greater enjoyment of the wine leads to better overall wine+food experience. And so more chomping.
Or, indeed, any combination of these three!
Related article: Diners Spend More In Lavender-Scented Restaurant
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Reference
Wansink, B., Payne, C.R., & North, J. (2007). Fine as North Dakota wine: Sensory expectations and the intake of companion foods. Physiology & Behavior, 90(5), 712-716.
Not only that, this expectation might well be passed on to other aspects of your behaviour, such as the amount of accompanying food you eat. Don't believe me? Check out this experiment by Wansink, Payne and North (2007).
The experiment
Thirty-nine unknowing participants sat down to a meal in a University restaurant. Half were served a glass of wine labelled as from California, the other half saw labels from North Dakota. A previous study had found that people had greater quality expectations of wine from California than that from North Dakota.
Actually both groups had been served the same wine, a Charles Shaw Cabernet Sauvignon costing $2.99. All were then served the same three-course meal with the weight of food carefully measured before and after they had eaten.
By measuring the difference, the researchers found that those served wine they thought was from California ate 12% more than those who thought their wine was from North Dakota.
So it seems that expectations of wine quality can affect how much food we eat.
Social facilitation?
But, what else could explain this difference in the amount eaten apart from the wine? Perhaps it was the social groups at each table? After all, you're likely to eat more if you're sat with other people who are wolfing it down, and less if others are all prodding their food as if it were poisonous.
To test this possibility, the authors carried out statistical tests to compare between tables. They reasoned that if social groupings were causing this difference then the tables at which participants sat would be a better predictor of the amount of food eaten than perceptions about the wine. But, again, it was perceptions about the wine that better predicted the amount of food eaten, not social groupings.
Interestingly, although perceptions about wine increased the amount of food eaten, they didn't increase the amount of the actual wine that was drunk. Surely, on average, diners would drink more of the wine they perceived as higher quality? The authors argue, however, that because all diners were restricted to a single glass, they didn't have the opportunity. So that's a question for future research.
Explanations
What mechanism might, then, connect expectations about wine with eating more food? Here's three the authors offer:
1. It could be that expectations about wine 'leak across' to the food: if the wine is good, the food should be good as well. So more chomping.
2. More drinking the 'tasty' wine decreases self-restraint leading to more chomping.
3. Greater enjoyment of the wine leads to better overall wine+food experience. And so more chomping.
Or, indeed, any combination of these three!
Related article: Diners Spend More In Lavender-Scented Restaurant
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Reference
Wansink, B., Payne, C.R., & North, J. (2007). Fine as North Dakota wine: Sensory expectations and the intake of companion foods. Physiology & Behavior, 90(5), 712-716.
Labels: Health
Why Academics Hide in Ivory Towers
In a recent post I asked 'What is the point of psychology?' - a question to which you had some great responses. These responses reminded me that what can seem like a simple question of psychology can elicit a fairly complicated answer. Which sent me back to wondering how people with no training and little exposure to psychological science view the work of academics and researchers.
Then I came across two posts by a couple of academic linguists which can show exactly how viciously people can react to academic research. The Polyglot Conspiracy describes the blogoshere's reaction to work carried out by linguist Mary Bucholtz into the meaning of nerdiness. Have a read...
The Language Log has a follow-up reaction with more thoughts on the ignorance of networked crowds.
I point to all this because in many ways it's exactly these kinds of ignorant attacks that many science blogs are hoping to counter, or at least mediate. I'm not saying science blogs are going to change many of these people's habits of thought, but there does at least need to be an alternative.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
Then I came across two posts by a couple of academic linguists which can show exactly how viciously people can react to academic research. The Polyglot Conspiracy describes the blogoshere's reaction to work carried out by linguist Mary Bucholtz into the meaning of nerdiness. Have a read...
The Language Log has a follow-up reaction with more thoughts on the ignorance of networked crowds.
I point to all this because in many ways it's exactly these kinds of ignorant attacks that many science blogs are hoping to counter, or at least mediate. I'm not saying science blogs are going to change many of these people's habits of thought, but there does at least need to be an alternative.
Subscribe to PsyBlog (RSS)
237 Reasons For Sex | Vegansexuals | Toilet Seats | Encephalon 28
This week, from my psychology notepad...
Here's a guaranteed way of getting your study covered, well, everywhere: make sure it includes 237 reasons why people have sex. The authors then boiled these down to four general categories: physical ("beautiful eyes"), goal attainment ("for a bet"), emotional ("to communicate on a deeper level") and insecurity ("duty").
And, as if 237 wasn't enough, the New York Times add a few of their own:
Talking of reasons to have sex, a study out this week revealed a hitherto unheralded sexual sub-group. These are vegans who will not sleep with meat-eaters, dubbed by the author of the study: 'vegansexuals'. It's a classic 'and finally' story over which one news anchor couldn't contain his laughter (video).
I expect similar levels of mirth would be elicited if our favourite news anchor were to read this game theoretical account of whether the toilet should be left up or down (via LinkMachineGo). That is, if he (or any of us) could understand it. Skip straight to the conclusions:
Extra marks for anyone who can tell me what a 'trembling-hand perfect equilibrium' is.
Out this week is the
Here's a guaranteed way of getting your study covered, well, everywhere: make sure it includes 237 reasons why people have sex. The authors then boiled these down to four general categories: physical ("beautiful eyes"), goal attainment ("for a bet"), emotional ("to communicate on a deeper level") and insecurity ("duty").
And, as if 237 wasn't enough, the New York Times add a few of their own:
"...nowhere among the 237 reasons will you find the one attributed to the actress Joan Crawford: "I need sex for a clear complexion." (The closest is "I thought it would make me feel healthy.") Nor will you find anything about gathering rosebuds while ye may (the 17th-century exhortation to young virgins from Robert Herrick). Nor the similar hurry-before-we-die rationale ("The grave's a fine and private place/ But none I think do there embrace") from Andrew Marvell in "To His Coy Mistress.""
Talking of reasons to have sex, a study out this week revealed a hitherto unheralded sexual sub-group. These are vegans who will not sleep with meat-eaters, dubbed by the author of the study: 'vegansexuals'. It's a classic 'and finally' story over which one news anchor couldn't contain his laughter (video).
I expect similar levels of mirth would be elicited if our favourite news anchor were to read this game theoretical account of whether the toilet should be left up or down (via LinkMachineGo). That is, if he (or any of us) could understand it. Skip straight to the conclusions:
"For "mankind", the analysis in this paper has the following appeal: Once again, it has been found that the social norm of leaving the toilet seat down is inefficient; hence, "mankind" may feel vindicated.
For "womankind", the analysis in this paper is appealing for the following reason: It has been shown that the social norm of leaving the seat down is a trembling-hand perfect equilibrium. Hence, this norm is not likely to go away, at least in the near future."
Extra marks for anyone who can tell me what a 'trembling-hand perfect equilibrium' is.
Out this week is the